编者按： 当前，中国资本市场风生水起，公募基金行业一场以投资者为本、以推动行业高质量发展为目标的系统性改革，悄然拉开大幕。这场深刻变革，正以前所未有的 力度与广度，重塑着行业的新生态，催生出新活力。一个正在脱胎换骨、以实际行动赢回投资者信赖、服务实体经济质效更高的公募基金新时代，正在迎面走 来。今日起，本报特别策划推出"公募十变.共塑高质量发展新生态"系列报道，敬请垂注。 公募基金费率改革正在迎来从降费让利到机制重构的纵深推进。 自2023年7月证监会发布实施《公募基金行业费率改革工作方案》以来，公募基金费率改革正在按照"管理费用－交易费用-销售费用"三阶段稳步推进，特别是2025 年5月，证监会发布的《推动公募基金高质量发展行动方案》中再次提到，优化主动权益类基金收费模式，大力推行基于业绩比较基准的浮动管理费收取模式。随 后，两批新型浮动费率基金陆续获批发行。 多位基金行业资深人士向证券时报记者表示，费率改革两大关键环节有望再迎实质性突破：其一，作为探索管理人与投资者利益绑定的核心举措，浮动费率基金未 来有望转入常规化审批，并有望扩容至"固收+"产品；其二，公募基金销售费用相关的管理规定可望公开征求意见。 ...

公募基金费率改革正在迎来从降费让利到机制重构的纵深推进。 此外，第二批浮动费率基金也发行提速，其中易方达价值回报、中欧核心智选两只新型浮动费率基金已 经提前结束募集，募集金额均超20亿元。 相比首批产品，第二批新型浮动费率模式已再次有所创新。一是投资策略更加多元，除了全市场选股产 品外，第二批还有聚焦行业或者主题的产品，比如建信医疗创新、华泰柏瑞制造业主题混合等产品；二 是费率降档阈值设定更加严格。比如，相较新型浮动费率产品普遍"跑赢6个百分点、跑输3个百分点"的 年化超额升降档阈值，华泰柏瑞制造业主题混合基金将降档阈值调整为"跑输2个百分点"，对基金管理 人提出了更高要求。 华泰柏瑞基金表示，新型浮动费率模式的意义远不止于费率本身的变化，同时，它还通过费率机制设 计，强化管理人与投资者利益的深度绑定，建立了更公平的利益共享、风险共担机制。在浮动费率模式 下，管理费收入直接与基金创造的超额收益挂钩，这直接推动基金管理人将核心资源投入到提升主动管 理能力、创造超额收益上，努力帮投资者多赚钱。 自2023年7月证监会发布实施《公募基金行业费率改革工作方案》以来，公募基金费率改革正在按照"管 理费用—交易费用—销售 ...

因此，一场评价体系的改革也势在必行。监管、基金公司、评价机构乃至媒体都应协同推进考核评价体 系的系统性优化，将长期业绩、投资者回报、风险控制等指标置于更核心的位置，让真正优秀的、为投 资者创造长期价值的管理人脱颖而出。 主编:陈楚编辑:汪云鹏美编：彭春霞 公募费率改革已然进入"下半场"，其核心命题不再仅仅是规则的调整与成本的削减，而是更为艰巨、也 更为根本的任务——重塑一个与投资者利益深度绑定的行业新生态。 首先，费率模式的创新，应是"百花齐放"而非"整齐划一"。公募基金作为服务万千投资者的资管工具， 其产品谱系复杂，策略千差万别，因此，监管的导向应是鼓励多元化、差异化的费率模式探索。 证券时报记者调研发现，除了扩大现有浮动费率产品的覆盖范围，业内还正在探索"固定管理费+业绩 报酬"等更灵活的模式，或是针对指数基金等工具型产品建立与规模挂钩的阶梯费率机制。无论何种形 式，其核心要义均在于，让费率真正反映其管理难度、风险承担和为投资者创造的价值，给予市场主体 更多创新空间。 其次，改革的成功，离不开配套体系的同频共振。费率改革，本质上是对行业利益分配机制的深刻调 整，它必然会触动固有的考核与评价体系，倘若基金公 ...

Core Viewpoint - The equity fund market is experiencing robust growth, with the total scale of public funds reaching 34.48 trillion yuan by the end of July, indicating strong vitality in the asset management industry [1] Group 1: Market Growth and Trends - The number of newly established equity funds in the year reached 608, with a total issuance scale of 286.14 billion yuan, representing 72.81% and 44.31% of the total market respectively, showing significant growth compared to last year's figures of 58.55% and 15.77% [3] - The issuance landscape of equity funds is being reshaped, with a total of 835 new fund products established this year, amounting to 645.72 billion yuan, reflecting strong demand for these products [4] Group 2: Investment Strategies and Fund Management - The management philosophy of public fund managers is shifting from focusing on initial scale to emphasizing holding effectiveness, marking a transition from scale-driven to quality-driven strategies [5] - The trend of "old redemption for new purchase" in channels is being constrained, pushing fund companies towards long-termism and reinforcing the importance of performance-driven growth [5] Group 3: Product Innovation and Market Environment - A-share valuations are at historically low levels, coupled with structural opportunities from economic transformation, enhancing the attractiveness of equity assets [4] - New product innovations, such as floating fee rate funds and cash flow strategy funds, are entering the market, indicating ongoing supply-side innovation [4]

Core Viewpoint - The public fund sales institutions are undergoing a transformation due to the shrinking of trailing commissions and upcoming sales fee reforms, shifting from a "sell-side sales" model to a "buy-side service" model [1][2][5]. Group 1: Impact of Fee Reforms - The first impact on fund sales institutions is the reduction of trailing commissions, with management fees and custody fees decreasing since the initiation of the public fund fee reform in July 2023. The projected management fee income for 2024 is 124.73 billion yuan, an 8.1% decrease from 2023, with trailing commissions expected to be 35.48 billion yuan, down 8.7% [3]. - Many fund sales institutions, such as China Merchants Bank and Tiantian Fund, reported a significant decline in their distribution income, with reductions around 20% [4]. - The second impact is the anticipated reduction in sales fees, which is expected to be implemented by 2025, further constraining the revenue space for sales institutions [5]. Group 2: Transformation Strategies - Fund sales institutions are actively seeking transformation strategies in response to the dual pressures of commission shrinkage and upcoming sales fee reductions [6]. - Companies like Jiyu Fund are adjusting their product structures to focus more on multi-asset and equity products, enhancing their service offerings to meet diverse investor needs [7]. - Yingmi Fund is adopting a buy-side advisory model, aiming to align its interests with those of clients and reduce reliance on sales fees by developing a comprehensive advisory service system [8]. Group 3: Evaluation and Performance Metrics - The regulatory framework is shifting towards evaluating fund sales institutions based on investor returns, emphasizing the importance of maintaining investor profitability and long-term performance [9][10]. - Companies are adjusting their internal assessment mechanisms to focus more on the long-term stability and goal achievement of institutional clients, rather than just overall scale [11]. - The industry consensus is moving towards enhancing the investor experience through comprehensive advisory services, addressing the historical focus on initial sales rather than ongoing client engagement [12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The public fund industry is undergoing significant reforms, leading to a transformation in fund sales institutions as they adapt to shrinking income from trailing commissions and upcoming sales fee reductions [1][2][3]. Group 1: Impact of Fee Reductions - The first major impact on fund sales institutions is the reduction of trailing commissions, with management fees and trailing commissions both decreasing since the initiation of the public fund fee reform in July 2023. The management fee income is projected to be 124.73 billion yuan in 2024, down 8.1% from 2023, while trailing commissions are expected to be 35.48 billion yuan, a decrease of 8.7% [2]. - Many fund sales institutions, such as China Merchants Bank and Tonghuashun, reported a significant decline in their distribution income, with reductions around 20% [2]. - The second wave of impact is anticipated with the upcoming sales fee reductions, which are expected to be implemented by May 2025, further constraining the income potential for sales institutions [3]. Group 2: Transition Strategies - Fund sales institutions are shifting from a seller-driven model to a buyer service model in response to the fee reductions. This includes adjusting product offerings from fixed-income products to multi-asset and equity products to meet diverse investor needs [4][5]. - Companies like Yingmi Fund are focusing on deepening their buyer advisory model, moving towards a fee structure based on advisory services rather than sales commissions [5][6]. - The industry is also seeing a push towards enhancing investor experience and focusing on long-term performance, with institutions like Tencent Licai Tong implementing comprehensive advisory services to improve investor decision-making and outcomes [8][9]. Group 3: Evaluation and Performance Metrics - The regulatory framework is evolving to include a classification evaluation mechanism for fund sales institutions, emphasizing metrics such as investor returns and holding periods, which will guide internal assessment and incentive structures [6][7]. - Companies are increasingly focusing on aligning their performance metrics with investor outcomes, with organizations like Yingmi Fund integrating user satisfaction and trust into their performance evaluations [7][10]. - The emphasis on improving investor holding experiences is becoming a common goal across the industry, with strategies aimed at enhancing investor education and risk awareness to foster better long-term investment behaviors [10].

Group 1 - The fund industry is experiencing a wave of fee reductions, with over 20 funds announcing lower management and/or custody fees, aimed at reducing investor holding costs [1][2] - The number of "low-fee" fund products with management fees at 0.15% or below has surpassed 1,050 [1] - Major fund companies such as E Fund, Guotai Junan, and others have implemented fee reductions, with some funds lowering management fees significantly, such as a drop from 0.90% to 0.55% [1] Group 2 - The current wave of fee reductions reflects the ongoing deepening of public fund fee reforms, with expectations for a third phase focusing on sales fees to accelerate [2] - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has indicated that further reductions in fund sales fees are expected to save investors approximately 45 billion yuan annually starting in 2025 [2] Group 3 - As the number of low-fee products increases, fund companies are exploring more refined charging models, such as tiered service fees based on holding periods to encourage long-term investment [4] - The continuous fee reductions are pushing the industry towards a more standardized and inclusive direction, while fund companies are encouraged to strengthen their research capabilities to attract and retain investors [4]

Core Viewpoint - The shift of deposits from traditional banks to money market funds (MMFs) may not yield the expected higher returns due to increasing fee rates that significantly reduce actual earnings [1][2][3]. Group 1: Market Trends - In May 2023, several major state-owned banks lowered deposit rates, with three-year fixed deposit rates dropping to the "1" range, prompting a "deposit migration" trend among savers towards MMFs, bond funds, and bank wealth management products [1]. - The total scale of MMFs increased from 13.32 trillion yuan at the end of March to 14.40 trillion yuan by the end of May 2023, reflecting a growth of over 1 trillion yuan in just two months [4][8]. Group 2: Fee Structures - Many MMFs have high fee rates, with nearly 30% of MMFs having management fees of 0.3% or higher, and almost 40% charging sales service fees of 0.25% or more, leading to comprehensive operational fee rates exceeding 0.6% for numerous funds [2][3]. - The average operational comprehensive fee rate for MMFs has surpassed 0.4%, while some funds, particularly those transitioning from brokerage margin products, maintain management fees above 0.7%, with the highest reaching 0.9% [3][4]. Group 3: Impact on Returns - For ordinary investors seeking low-risk and flexible liquidity, high-fee MMFs can significantly diminish net returns, with operational fees potentially consuming nearly 30% of total earnings in some cases [3][6]. - The largest MMF, Tianhong Yu'ebao, has an operational comprehensive fee rate of 0.63%, which, when factored into its net yield of 1.5867% for 2024, indicates that fees substantially impact investor returns [4][6]. Group 4: Challenges in Fee Reduction - The high fee structure of MMFs poses challenges for fee reductions, as they are a crucial revenue source for asset management companies and distribution channels [7]. - The need for fee reductions is acknowledged, especially as MMF fees currently exceed those of index funds, but actual reductions depend on negotiations among asset management firms, banks, and distribution platforms [7][8]. Group 5: Future Considerations - Asset management firms are encouraged to optimize operational costs through improved transaction systems and the use of technology to enhance efficiency, which could create opportunities for lowering management fees [8]. - The balance between operational sustainability and investor experience remains a long-term challenge for asset management institutions in the MMF sector [9].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the significant growth of ETF funds in China, highlighting a historical turning point where passive equity fund sizes are set to surpass active equity funds by the end of 2024, driven by various market dynamics and investor preferences [2][5]. Group 1: Market Trends - By the end of 2024, the size of passive equity funds in China is projected to reach 3.61 trillion yuan, surpassing active equity funds at 3.46 trillion yuan, marking a significant shift in the investment landscape [2]. - The share of passive ETFs within passive equity funds has dramatically increased from 38% in 2015 to 90% in 2024, while passive open-end funds have decreased from 62% to 10% [5]. - The U.S. market has seen a similar trend, with passive funds surpassing active funds in total assets by the end of 2023, indicating a fundamental change in market structure [5]. Group 2: Fee Structure - The rapid development of domestic ETFs over the past seven years has led to a competitive environment where fund companies have reduced fees to differentiate their products [8]. - The net operating fee rate for domestic ETFs has remained stable from 2018 to 2023, with a notable decline in 2024, influenced by regulatory reforms and competitive pressures [9][10]. - Major ETFs have collectively reduced management and custody fees from 0.5% and 0.1% to 0.15% and 0.05%, contributing to the overall decrease in industry fee levels [10]. Group 3: Value Creation - The article emphasizes the importance of actual value creation in ETFs, with a focus on funds that have significantly increased their asset sizes after accounting for inflows and outflows [20]. - The top 10 value-creating ETFs in China are primarily large-scale funds tracking broad market indices, reflecting a prevailing investment strategy focused on low-cost, diversified exposure [20]. - Similar trends are observed in the U.S. market, where low-cost passive funds tracking major indices dominate the value creation rankings [24]. Group 4: Investment Risks - The article notes that ETFs focused on specific themes or sectors tend to exhibit higher volatility and risk, often leading to significant value losses for investors [28][29]. - The top 10 ETFs with the largest value losses in China are primarily thematic funds, highlighting the risks associated with narrow investment focuses [28]. - In the U.S., a majority of the funds with the highest value losses are also ETFs concentrated on specific sectors or themes, reinforcing the notion that broad market exposure generally mitigates risk [31].

Core Viewpoint - A new wave of fund fee reductions has emerged, primarily affecting bond funds, as various asset management companies announce lower management and custody fees in response to regulatory reforms aimed at reducing overall fund costs for investors [1][3]. Group 1: Recent Fee Reductions - Nearly 10 funds have announced fee reductions in June, with a focus on bond products [1]. - Citic Securities Fund announced a reduction in the custody fee for its bond fund from 0.1% to 0.05%, effective June 9, 2025 [1]. - Zheshang Securities Asset Management reduced the custody fee for its bond fund from 0.15% to 0.08%, effective June 5, 2025 [1]. - Jianxin Fund lowered the management fee from 0.7% to 0.3% and the custody fee from 0.2% to 0.1% for its bond fund, effective June 6, 2025 [1]. - Southern Fund announced a reduction in management and custody fees for its mixed fund, with management fees dropping from 1.0% to 0.6% and custody fees from 0.2% to 0.1%, effective June 9, 2025 [1]. Group 2: Background and Regulatory Context - The current wave of fee reductions began in July 2023, following the China Securities Regulatory Commission's announcement of a fee reform plan for public funds [3]. - The fee reform is structured in three phases: reducing management fees, trading commissions, and sales service fees [3]. - By 2025, the reform will enter its third phase, with further reductions in sales fees expected, potentially saving investors a total of 45 billion yuan annually [3]. - As a result of the ongoing fee reform, the number of funds with management fees at or below 0.15% has exceeded 1,000, while those with custody fees at or below 0.05% have surpassed 2,100 [3].